Little brother is watching you The legal and ethical issue of employer’s looking over the shoulder of their employees. Jeff Linton

The issue A software package, called Little Brother, that uses a database of 45,000 web sites, is allowing employers to monitor their employee’s internet usage. The software categorizes software as productive, nonproductive or neutral and then will provide the employers ratings for their employees based on web sites visited throughout the workday. The software also includes programs to block objectionable web sites, remotely enter employee hard drives, read their email, and find deleted emails.

The law According to the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, it is illegal for unauthorized individuals to look at someone else’s email, but the Act exempts service providers from these provisions. This is commonly interpreted to include employers who provide e-mail and Net access. According to Santa Clara University Professor of Law Dorothy Glancy. "Often, court opinions take the point of view that when the employees are using employers' property—the employers' computers and networks—the employees' expectation of privacy is minimal.”

The law The article gave an example where a man was fired for inappropriate emails to his supervisor about management. He claimed his rights were violated because the company promised him his emails were private. However, the courts ruled in the company’s favor, saying “The company's interest in preventing inappropriate and unprofessional conduct outweighed the man’s privacy rights.”

Case for workplace monitoring One benefit that few people can argue with is that employers can use the software to find and delete games that employees have downloaded or installed. One probably can not find issue with employers expecting computers they provide for work to be used for work. So, the big question is, why is it then a big deal that employers look through employee internet browsing history to see if they are spending their time on work- related activities? The article defined this browsing “cyberlollygagging” and stated “A study by Nielsen Media Research found that employees at major corporations such as IBM, Apple, and AT&T logged onto the online edition of Penthouse thousands of times a month.”

Case for workplace monitoring On top of looking at non- work related materials, employers also have to worry about employees using email to steal key information from them. The article cited a man who was caught emailing his personal email account $5 million bytes of company source code on company products. It was found out he was doing this to bring it to a rival company of which he was leaving to go work for! Lastly, employers have to worry about being sued for inappropriate work atmospheres due to inappropriate emails. This includes sexual or racial jokes and pornographic material that may forwarded to other employees in the business.

Case against workplace monitoring An employee writes a note to her boyfriend. She puts it in an envelope, affixes her own stamp, and drops it in the basket where outgoing mail is collected. Does the fact that the pencil and paper she used belong to her employer give her boss the right to open and read this letter? Is this so different than the employer looking into this employee’s email to her boyfriend just because they own the computer?

Case against workplace monitoring Most would argue that as long as their internet usage does not interfere with the job they are being paid for, what’s the big deal? Others claim the time management spends monitoring employee usage is just as much a waste of time as their time on non- work related websites! Also, while employee computers are being monitored, who is monitoring management’s computers?

Can there be common ground? In order to avoid anger, confusion, and a feeling of privacy invasion, employers have to be honest up front, especially contractually, about how much “computer privacy” employees will actually have. If employees are not OK with companies being able to look at their emails and web surfing history, and are told up front that it will be happening, they can go elsewhere to work. A recent survey of employees at various businesses showed that most employees heard about their e-mail policy by word of mouth or were involved in the writing of the policy.

My opinion I personally have no problem with companies looking at my internet browsing history, as long as they keep the big picture in mind. If I am looking at pornography, then yes, I deserve to have consequences. However, if it is shown that I have spent time on ESPN.com, and my work is getting done, then who cares!

My opinion Companies really need to take a look at worker productivity in terms of the work that is assigned to employees. If they see someone is getting their job done but has spent hours on non- work related sites, then give them more work to do, not fire them! Don’t think management should be allowed to look at their employees’ email unless it is needed in some sort of legal issue.

Article Miriam Schulman, Santa Clara University http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v9n2/brother.html